0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

Investigation of Single-Jet Combustor Near Lean Blowout Conditions Using Flamelet-Generated Manifold Combustion Model and Detailed Chemistry

[+] Author and Article Information
Sunil Patil

ANSYS, Inc.,
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
e-mail: Sunil.Patil@ansys.com

Judy Cooper, Stefano Orsino

ANSYS, Inc.,
Lebanon, NH 03760

Joseph Meadows, Richard Valdes, Walter R. Laster

Siemens Energy, Inc.,
Orlando, FL 32826

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 22, 2016; final manuscript received June 27, 2016; published online August 2, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 138(12), 121503 (Aug 02, 2016) (7 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1264; doi: 10.1115/1.4034041 History: Received June 22, 2016; Revised June 27, 2016

Numerical simulation results of a single-jet premixed combustion system at atmospheric pressure are compared against comprehensive particle image velocimetry (PIV) flow measurements and Raman scattering temperature measurements for natural gas and hydrogen fuels. The simulations were performed on hexahedral meshes with 1–5 × 106 elements. Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) calculations were carried out with the k–ε realizable turbulence model. Combustion was modeled using the flamelet-generated manifold model (FGM) and detailed chemistry. Both the flame position and flame liftoff predicted by the FGM were in reasonable agreement with experiments for both fuels and showed little sensitivity to heat transfer or radiation modeling. The detailed chemistry calculation predicts the temperature gradients along the jet centerline accurately and compares very closely with the Raman scattering measurements. The much closer agreement of the jet axial velocity and temperature profiles with experimental values, coupled with the significantly protracted presence of intermediates in the detailed chemistry predictions, indicates that the impact of nonequilibrium intermediates on very lean natural gas flames is significant.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Three-dimensional computer-aided design (CAD) model and photograph of the experimental test rig

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Three-dimensional isometric view of the computational geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

A cross-sectional view of the mesh (fine) through the centerline of the jet

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Normalized axial velocity comparison of (a) FGM and (b) PIV data for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Normalized static temperature comparison between FGM predictions and Raman scattering temperature data for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Normalized axial velocity distribution at midplane using detailed chemistry for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Normalized static temperature distribution at midplane using detailed chemistry for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Normalized axial velocity profile comparison along the centerline of the jet for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Normalized static temperature profile comparison along the centerline of the jet for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Normalized axial velocity comparison of (a) FGM and (b) PIV data for hydrogen fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Normalized axial velocity profile comparison along the centerline of the jet using for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Normalized static temperature profile comparison along the centerline of the jet for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of jet centerline OH mass fractions for methane fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Normalized static temperature comparison between FGM and Raman scattering temperature data for hydrogen fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Normalized axial velocity profile comparison along the centerline of the jet using FGM model for hydrogen fuel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Normalized axial temperature profile comparison along the centerline of the jet using FGM model for hydrogen fuel

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In